That’s exactly why you & others in here suffer from the TDS duff, & why I glad we have actual moderates here like Snipa, who do not.

I think the vast majority of supporters on both sides, saw both HRC & Trump as the lesser of two evils. They were both pretty shitty candidates, however at the end of the day each one would progress their parties platforms. So, the right voted for Trump & the left voted for Hillary.

& then both parties back tracked on how they actually liked to candidates.

The left went from Hillary’s the most qualified candidate evaaa!! She’s going to fuckin kill it!!!

...to well, she was a pretty awful candidate, bUt ShE wAs ThE LeSsEr Of TwO eViLs

& the right went from Trump isn’t like the other politicians! He’s going to run the country like a business!

...to well, the economy is doing great & how about those SCOTUS picks! Sure he says / tweets some dumb, ignorant things, bUt He WaS tHe LeSsEr Of ThE tWo EvIlS!

I suppose it’s easier to paint people with broad strokes instead of coming to grips with reality

Are you trying to break the planet? because this is how you break the planet.

i mean, objectively, can you name a more "qualified" candidate? assuming time served in federal govt = qualification



lol, man im bored.



crying emoji

crying emoji

crying emoji

angry emoji

This post was edited by thesnipa on Nov 30 2018 03:01pm

I agree, I think the country would be almost as divided if HRC won. I do think Trump has probably made political polarization worse, and I also think the public discourse would be slightly less toxic - but just as dysfunctional and unproductive.

If Clinton wins, the GOP probably strengthen their grip on both chambers of Congress and then have an even larger majority with a good shot at taking the White House in 2020. They'd also clean up on the local and state level.

I would agree that Clinton losing to Trump is better for Democrats in the long-term except for the fact that it cost them at least 1 SCOTUS seat and probably more. It would be much better for Democrats long-term to have a SCOTUS that struck down gerrymandering and defended voting rights.

Besides, Clinton losing didn't change the party for the better that much, anyways. The Democratic Party hasn't really learned from it's mistakes and is rolling out a lot of the same leaders and rhetoric as they did in 2016.



I would very much like that, but it's difficult for many Trump supporters to discuss topics or criticisms of the President without bringing up Hillary Clinton.

In this case, this whole discussion was started with me asking if Trump should have divested himself more from his business, and then the whatabout Clinton stuff started rolling in, and here we are.

I've proposed creating a Trump thread and a Clinton thread in PaRD where conversations and criticisms should remain on topic without all the whataboutisms that tend to derail discussion. This idea would inevitably fail, but it's nice to think about.

You are completely wrong like usual, Ghot and Fender cant be compared like this.

I can usually trust NPR to steer clear of fake news and instead just hemorrhage bias, selective presentation and absurd amounts of smug liberal condescension.
But nope, NPR went full blown fake news;
http://thefederalist.com/2018/11/30/npr-blatantly-lies-about-donald-trump-jr-s-2017-senate-testimony/

NPR cropped Jr's quote from a transcript out of context and presented it as if he said something completely different than what he said, even though the questions immediately before and after that one explicitly clarify what he was talking about and he answered the question about the trump tower deal earlier in the transcript and confirmed it was ongoing in 2016.
Here's NPR's quote:



Here's the quote in context, as the federalist points out:



Is there any way in which we can chalk this up as a mistake by a journalist?
I don't see how this could be done with simple lack of journalistic responsibility but would instead require malicious intent to willfully misrepresent what he said. How could they read that one passage without seeing the quotes immediately on either side of the transcript and still quote it verbatim? Someone had to consciously crop the quote to remove the bits that contradict their narrative.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Nov 30 2018 03:05pm

I put Ghot on the right

I put fender in the left

Gosh I wonder why